LOWER STANDARD NOTED

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21858, 11 August 1936, Page 10

LOWER STANDARD NOTED

MATRICULATION IN NEW ZEALAND COMPARISON WITH GREAT BRITAIN

Although he was impressed with the soundness of New Zealand education in the fundamentals, it was quite evident that the matriculation standard in Great Britain was much “stiffer” than in the Dominion, said Mr J. Hossack, of Edinburgh, when interviewed by a representative of “The Press” on the eve of his departure on his return journey to Scotland. Accompanied by his wife, Mr llossack came out to the Otago Boys’ High School on exchange for about 12 months from the Royal High School at Edinburgh, an historic institution which dates back to the twelfth century. The lower matriculation standard in New Zealand was not because the young people of this country had less ability than the children of Britain, or that their teachers were any less efficient, Mr Hossack said. The difference lay m the fact that the University of New Zealand set a lower standard. New Zealand students, too, started their university careers at an earlier age than in Great Britain, where a bright pupil "put in five years at a secondary school and the average pupil six years, before being competent to sit for the matriculation examination. In New Zealand, of course, a bright pupil could matriculate in three years. Another point which impressed Mr Hossack was that the number of pupils who attended university after matriculating was relatively smaller in New Zealand. In New Zealand the average pupil continued his studies at a secondary school for at least a year beyond the matriculation stage, whereas in Great Britain a pupil did not need any extra tuition after matriculating preparatory to entering a university. Incidentally, Mr Hossack mentioned that in Britain matriculation was necessary for entrance into insurance offices and banks.